Quality Control of an Ultrasound System in a University Hospital
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29384/rbfm.2026.v20.19849001843Keywords:
Quality Control, ultrasound, normative instruction, university hospital, phantomAbstract
This study focuses on quality control in ultrasonography at a university hospital in Sergipe, with a particular emphasis on the adequacy of procedures in accordance with Normative Instruction 96 of ANVISA RDC 611/2022. The implementation of this instruction represents a recent advance in the Brazilian regulatory scenario. While ultrasound quality control programs are well-established in other countries, they are still being systematized in Brazil. Ultrasound is a noninvasive imaging method commonly used to diagnose pathologies, such as breast cancer. Therefore, systematic quality control of ultrasound examinations is essential to ensure diagnostic reliability and healthcare safety. While this method does depend on the operator, quality control is a fundamental technical requirement. This article discusses the analysis of normative documents and the practical evaluation of a 404GS LE model phantom, emphasizing the quality control protocol for breast ultrasound examinations. Tests were performed at three time points (initially, after six months, and after eight months) and included evaluations of image uniformity, axial and lateral resolution, dead zone, penetration depth, focal zone, measurement accuracy, and visualization of anechoic objects. In the initial test, nonconformities were identified in the uniformity and resolution parameters of two of the evaluated transducers. These issues were corrected and verified in subsequent tests. It can be concluded that systematically implementing quality control is essential for monitoring equipment performance. To ensure diagnostic reliability and exam safety, preventive or corrective maintenance of equipment, continuous training of operators, and strict application of current regulations are emphasized.
Downloads
References
1. Blackstock D. Fundamentals of Physical Acoustic. New York: Wiley Publisher; 2000.
2. Oliveira FG. Responsabilidade civil do radiologista no diagnóstico do câncer de mama através do exame de mamografia. Radiologia Brasileira. 2011; 44(3):183-7.
3. Papaléo RM. Ultrassonografia: Princípios Físicos e Controle da Qualidade. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica. 2019; 13(1):14-23
4. Lima JL. Reprodução e estudo de artefatos no ultrassom. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica. 2013; 7(2):205-8.
5. Chammas MC. Ultra-sonografia abdominal. Rio de Janeiro: Revinter; 2009.
6. Hall EJ, Giaccia AJ. Radiobiology for the Radiologist. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012.
7. Uematsu T. The future of breast ultrasonography through non-mass lesions. J Med Ultrason. 2024; 51(1):153-4.
8. Kollmann CJ. EFSUMB Clinical Safety Statement for Diagnostic Ultrasound - (2019 revision). Ultraschall Med. 2020; 41(4):387-9.
9. AIUM. Standards and Guidelines for the Accreditation of Ultrasound Practices. 2022. Disponível em: https://www.aium.org/officialstatements/26.
10. ACR, American College of Radiology. ACR Practice Parameters for Ultrasound Equipment. 2016. Disponível em: https://www.acr.org/-/media/ACR/Files/Practice-Parameters/US-Equip.pdf.
11. Lorentsson R et al. Investigation of the impact of defective ultrasound transducers on clinical image quality in grayscale 2-D still images. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology 49.9 2023; 49:2126-2133.
12. Åhman A et al. Without ultrasound you can’t reach the best decision’–Midwives’ experiences and views of the role of ultrasound in maternity care in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania. Sexual & reproductive healthcare. 2018;15:28-34.
13. Goodsitt MC. Real-time B-mode ultrasound quality control test procedures. Report of AAPM Ultrasound Task Group No 1. 1998.
14. AIUM. AIUM Quality Assurance Manual for Gray-Scale Ultrasound Scanners. AIUM Technical Standards Committee; 1995.
15. NCRP. Quality Assurance for Diagnostic Imaging Equipment. NRCP; 1998.
16. ANVISA, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). Portaria 453 do Ministério da Saúde: Diretrizes de Proteção Radiológica em Radiodiagnóstico Médico e Odontológico. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; 1998.
17. ANVISA, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). RESOLUÇÃO – RDC No 330. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; 2019.
18. ANVISA, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). RESOLUÇÃO – RDC No 440. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; 2020.
19. ANVISA, Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (ANVISA). RESOLUÇÃO – RDC No 611. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União; 2022.
20. Poggi C, Palavecino M. Ultrasound principles and instrumentation. Surgery Open Science. 2024; 18:123-128.
21. Bushberg JT. The essential physics of medical imaging. 3rd ed. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2011.
22. Papaléo RM, Souza DS. Ultrassonografia: princípios físicos e controle da qualidade. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica. 2019;13(1):14-23.
23. Otto C. Fundamentos de ecocardiografia clínica 4a edição. Elsevier Brasil, 2010.
24. Delolio GN. Levantamento das principais falhas em transdutores de ultrassom [Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso]. Ribeirão Preto: Faculdade de Tecnologia Ribeirão Preto; 2021.
25. Lima EAS et al. Análise Quantitativa da Uniformidade de Imagens de Ultrassom: Uma Abordagem Embasada no Método de Horssen. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica, 2025; 19: 834-834.
26. Dewerd LA, Lawless M. The Simulatorsof Medical and Health Physics. Biological and Medical Physics, Biomedical Engineering 2013.
27. Wang F. et al. Flexible Doppler ultrasound device for the monitoring of blood flow velocity. Science advances, 2021; 7(44): eabi9283.
28. Gomes F, Silva, FR. Construção de simulador de baixo custo para avaliação da qualidade da imagem de ultrassonografia no modo doppler. Revista Brasileira de Física Médica, 2025:19, 808-808.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Brunno Florencia de Oliveira, Gabriela Guimarães Donald, Anderson Manoel Bezerra da Silva, Priscila Santos Amorim, Isis Larissa dos Santos Barreto, Linda Viola Ehlin Caldas, Divanizia do Nascimento Souza
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The submission of original articles to the Brazilian Journal of Medical Physics implies the transfer, by the authors, of the rights of print and digital publication. Copyright for published articles remains with the author, with journal rights on first publication. Authors may only use the same results in other publications by clearly indicating this journal as the original publisher. As we are an open access journal, free use of articles in educational, scientific, non-commercial applications is allowed, as long as the source is cited.
The Brazilian Journal of Medical Physics is under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0).
